Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Topkek

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Topkek[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

PROD removed by ip with edit summary 'deleted trash'. No reasonable claim that these muffins are notable. TheLongTone (talk) 10:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Difficult to find references for this. NickCT (talk) 19:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In WP there are over 400 articles tagged for dessert stub. What is wrong with this particular dish ? Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 19:16, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First, the fact that other articles exist is not an argument for keeping another:see WP:OTHERSTUFF. Secondly, this is not a dessert or type of food: it is a proprietry brand of cake. Even searching with the brand (ETI topkek) doesnt throw up anything. Asserion of notability is some dumb internet notoriety.TheLongTone (talk) 22:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No mentions in databases. No mentions in gbooks. Non-notable biscuit. The fact that it's big on 4chan ain't helping me believe it exists even, but it's certainly not notable.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:30, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:28, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Only used on 4chan ... Most notably /b/ .... -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 00:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No indication that this muffin deserves its own article. Moswento ^talky 08:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.